150 posts from February 2010

Friday, February 26, 2010

"Exile Nation," author Charles Shaw's gripping account of his year behind bars -- in Cook County Jail and as a guest of the Illinois Department of Corrections -- is being serialized online here. Chapter Three is out now and it will continue to disabuse you of the idea that prison might be a nice break in your routine.

A few months back I took note of how common it is for politicians to promise on the stump that they will “look” at an issue, rather than to say specifically what they plan to do about it if elected. But no one I quoted was as relentlessly speculative as Jason Plummer, the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor, was Thursday evening when he was interviewed on WTTW-Channel 11’s “Chicago Tonight” program.

“I think that you have to look at several things,” Plummer said when host Phil Ponce asked him what, specifically, he thought should be cut from the state budget. “I think you have to look at merging certain programs. I think you have to look at the Medicaid program, I think you have to look at the way that that's structured. I think we have to look at what I like to call really the um,” Here he paused. “A lot of people say when it comes to Medicaid 10 to 12 percent maybe 15 percent of it's fraudulent. Why aren't we investigating that? There are savings there. Why aren't we looking at programs like the uh---“

What followed was an awkward gap of nearly 20 seconds during which Plummer couldn’t come up with the name of the next program he wanted to look at or even a single word. Ponce tried to help – “education?” he asked helpfully – before changing topics. Plummer went on to finish the interview by mentioning seven more things he felt should be looked at.

In a way it’s the perfect verb for a prospective lite gov, who will probably spend four years looking at but not touching the legislative process in Springfield, where he will be a highly paid cipher. What possible difference could it make, after all, which “certain programs” he might want to examine for their merger potential?

Still, those running for a real office ought to look at forswearing “look at” statements during the upcoming campaign. Most of them have it it backwards. Look at the issues, then tell us what you’re going to do.

Thursday, February 25, 2010

It gratifies and does not surprise me that Change of Subject readers are more than twice as well informed as the average person. Nearly 400 of you filled out my 20-question, online "So You Think you Know Health Care?" quiz about what is and isn't in the bills now before Congress.

Eighty seven percent correctly identified the public option from a series of choices, compared to just 37 percent found in a scientific poll taken last summer.

Here's how readers did on the whole quiz, best to worst. Results not scientific -- how could they be with respondents self-chosen from such a rarified group? -- but comparisons interesting nevertheless:

It is obvious that [Obama / McCain] is absolutely the right man to set our country back on track because of his clearly articulated economic plan for the future, his first-rate economic advisers, and most importantly, his genuine and natural leadership abilities that can unify Washington in action.

Daniel M. Butler
Assistant Professor
of Political Science at Yale University and a student researcher submitted the above letter to 100 American newspapers roughly two weeks before the 2008 presidential election to test whether pro-McCain or pro-Obama letters were more likely to be published.

The letters to the editors were submitted using the alias Emily Ross. To add credibility to
the submissions, a valid voicemail box and email address were also created using the alias.

Republicans have over and over been pointing to the fact that a narrow majority of Americans now oppose health-insurance reform proposals in the House and Senate as a big reason that Congress must reject it.

My contention is that most opponents, like most supporters, couldn't tell you what's in the bills , but let's assume, for a moment, that these are considered views. If the GOP is so hot on public opinion as the guiding star, why do they continue to oppose the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," the policy that drums gays out of the military? Check out these numbers from PollingReport.com:

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

In an extraordinary, two-hour interview with a handful of reporters and commentators -- including some who have been highly critical of his office -- Du Page County State's Attorney Joe Birkett said Wednesday morning that, in his opinion, charges never should have been brought against the three initial suspects in the Jeanine Nicarico murder case.

Ten-year-old Jeanine's 1983 murder sparked a series of investigations, trials and related controversies that lasted more than a quarter of a century. Now that the case appears to be over -- former Aurora resident Brian Dugan was sentenced to death in November after having pleaded guilty to the crime -- Birkett invited a group of journalists to his office for an open ended Q and A.

"Anybody who looks at what the evidence was then and what it is now would have to say these guys are innocent," said Birkett, referring to Rolando Cruz, Alex Hernandez and Stephen Buckley, who were tried for the murder in 1985. "They’re actually innocent. They had nothing to do with it."

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

American figure skater Johnny Weir.
The Quebec Gay and Lesbian Council has demanded a public apology from French-language broadcaster RDS after one commentator said (American figure skater Johnny Weir, pictured) hurts figure skating's image and another said Weir should be made to take a gender test.

The remarks were "outrageous" and "homophobic," CQGL said in a statement on its Web site....Australia's Channel Nine has reportedly gotten complaints from viewers after two of its hosts joked about the masculinity of Weir and other male skaters.

Can't a man swan about in femmy clothes and push the limits of androgyny in his speech and mannerisms without everyone questioning his manliness? It is outrageous. Come on, people!

A perfect introduction to the Bard—for audiences of all ages. In this 75-minute abridged production, a wildly entertaining tale unfolds as identical twin brothers—and their identical twin servants—are lost in a mixed-up world of mistaken identities. Following each performance, audiences are welcome to join the cast for a post-show discussion. Recommended for ages 8 and up.

The twins' recent "introduction to the Bard" in Language Arts class was reading "A Midsummer Night's Dream," a shaggy dog play whose reliance on magic to make the plot churn makes it one of the bigger mehs among Shakespeare's famous works. "The Comedy of Errors" sells Shakespeare far better and this production is irresistible. Critics seem to agree.

Also, I'll be out of town this weekend (at the True/False documentary film festival in Columbia, Mo.) but if I were here I'd hit the Chicago Maritime Festival Saturday
at the
Chicago History Museum
(Clark Street at North Avenue), particular the sea-songs concert in evening (7 p.m.) featuring John Roberts (of Roberts & Barrand). My fondness for shanties is among the qualities my wife gamely overlooks.

The editors at Esquire made a mistake when they posted Chris Jones’ and Ethan Hill’s wonderful profile of movie critic Roger Ebert on their Web site last week ..We are in the midst of an endless debate over free versus paid
content. I generally come down on the side of free Web access. Most
news is a commodity, and if you can’t get it from one place, you’ll get
it from another.

But the flip side is that when you’ve got something that isn’t a
mere commodity, you shouldn’t just give it away. Jones’ story about
Ebert, and Hill’s photography, comprise anything but a commodity. This
is exclusive, important, heart-breaking, inspirational journalism. And
it’s something that Esquire should have used to drive sales of the
magazine.

I'm glad Esquire posted the article and I'm sure tens if not hundreds of thousands of people saw it who wouldn't have otherwise, thus making it, in a way, an advertisement for Esquire as much as anything else. Yet I see Kennedy's point.

On "The Ed Show" last night on MSNBC, liberal host Ed Schultz played a sound clip for his guest, former Colorado Republican congressman Tom Tancredo, and then grilled him about it:

Sound clip from Colin Powell: I don't know where the claim comes that we are less safe (in American today from terrorism). The point is made, that, well, we don't waterboard anymore or use extreme interrogation techniques. Most of those extreme interrogation techniques and waterboarding were done away with in the Bush Administration. And they've been made officially done away with in this current administration. The issue about sending people to military commissions --we're not using military commissions like we should-- any time you lock somebody up or catch a terrorist, let's give him a military commission . In eight years, the military commissions have put three people on trial. Two of them served relatively short sentences and are free. One guy's in jail. Meanwhile the federal courts, our article three regular legal court system, has put dozens of terrorists in jail. And they're fully capable of doing it.

Ed Schultz: So why can't the conservatives in this country, Tom, follow that lead and bring the country together to fight terrorism instead of constantly tearing down the president? In fact, President Obama, he hasn't done anything right according to the conservatives. I want you to respond to Colin Powell....

Tancredo: Look, Ed, it's interesting that you say that because there are certain things of course that I think Obama has done right. He's continued a lot of Bush policies, as a matter of fact, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, now even, to a certain extent even of course Guantanamo. He's saying well you know, I really was wrong and we really have to do what Bush wanted and he is right on that, and I give him full credit for it. I think what a lot of Republicans and a lot of conservatives are concerned about are things like Mirandizing the Fruit-of-the-Loom bomber, going ahead and letting people out of Guantanamo far too soon, finding them back on battlefields fighting against Americans. These are the kinds of things that I think people are saying, you know what, I don't think Obama is right there and as a result I think we're less safe.

Schultz: All right. Tom Tancredo. I appreciate you being on the program , but I have to tell you, you have to get up on the current events now. The shoe bomber was also read his rights during the Bush years, and a hell of a lot faster than this guy was.

None of about 48 Guantanamo Bay detainees released or transferred elsewhere by the Obama administration has participated or been suspected of participating in subsequent "recidivist" activity, compared with 20 percent of about 540 detainees released by the George W. Bush administration.

Allegedly, the CIA last used waterboarding in 2003 on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and “It is believed that waterboarding was used on fewer than five ‘high-value’ terrorist subjects”

It's too bad, in my view, that Keith Olbermann is given such prominence on MSNBC given that his show, unlike Schultz's and Chris Matthews' and even, from time time, Rachel Maddow's, never invites on those with opposing views for this kind of illuminating jousting.

Why call Tancredo a phony and a liar when you can have him on the air and let him show you?

Bill Leff has called it quits as host of “ChicagoNow Radio” on Tribune Co.-owned news/talk WGN-AM (720). Starting this weekend, the Saturday morning showcase for bloggers on the Chicago Now roster will have a series of rotating hosts.

Leff did a good job with a tough assignment, hitting just about every pitch thrown at him by a succession of bloggers from a dizzyingly wide variety of fields. For some fool reason, he is evidently not in WGN's plans.

Any suggestions for WGN management as it retools the station? Please keep them clean.

Get the spoken-word version of this column and/or subscribe to my audio feed by clicking here

You’d think, with all his millions and so much on the line Friday, Tiger Woods could have sprung for a teleprompter.

Instead, he chose to read his 131/2-minute apology to the nation from a script resting on the lectern in front of him. This caused him to look down —to break eye contact with the television audience and those in the room — 200 times by my count, and made him appear awkward at best, calculating and insincere at worst.

The words may have come from his heart, but they seemed to come from the page. With each “nosedive” as they call these bobs of the head in the oratory game, Woods reminded us that “his” sentiments had certainly been wordsmithed for hours by a team of image consultants and crisis managers.

Monday, February 22, 2010

Occasionally I get requests from students to address media matters for papers they're working on. I reply when I can and figure I might as well post the Q & A in case anyone else aside from the student's teacher is interested. This came in today from a college junior:

Q. Do you feel reader comments are important to journalism? If so, how?

The Scripps-Howard News Service ismulling over President "Obama's unexplained reversal of the position he once held backing same-sex marriage."

The article references Obama's pro-marriage equality statements from the 90s -- Change of Subject readers learned of themmore than a year ago-- and his backtracking, which I analyzed here nearly three years ago. It adds this element:

Obama's reference to his religious convictions about marriage ...contrasts with the position of the denomination with which he has been most closely associated, the United Church of Christ....

In 2005, the United Church of Christ's governing General Synod passed a resolution endorsing "equal marriage rights for couples regardless of gender." The church, with 1.1 million members, is the largest U.S. denomination to support same-sex marriage.

ChicagoNow blogger and my occasional sparring partner Dennis Byrne makes a good point about U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman "finding TV pitchman Kevin Trudeau in contempt of court for asking his `fans' ... to e-mail the judge with messages attesting to how his products have change their lives."

One can come up with all kinds of analogies to demonstrate the ridiculousness of Gettleman's ruling. What if Trudeau asked fans to send snail mails to the judge? Can he request his fans to gather outside courtroom to demonstrate their support (in ways that people demonstrate in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in support of their decision)?

What Trudeau did was neither appropriate nor relevant, but asking people to communicate their true sentiments to a public person falls well within the boundaries of freedom of expression for Trudeau and his fans.

About "Change of Subject."

"Change of Subject" by Chicago Tribune op-ed columnist Eric Zorn contains observations, reports, tips, referrals and tirades, though not necessarily in that order. Links will tend to expire, so seize the day. For an archive of Zorn's latest Tribune columns click here. An explanation of the title of this blog is here. If you have other questions, suggestions or comments, send e-mail to ericzorn at gmail.com.
More about Eric Zorn

Contributing editor Jessica Reynolds is a 2012 graduate of Loyola University Chicago and is the coordinator of the Tribune's editorial board. She can be reached at jreynolds at tribune.com.